Apology to David Schütz..
posted by Brian Coyne , LINDEN, NSW, 17.09.2008, 15:44
The discussion that erupted in this place on David Schütz has been described as a “low point for CA”. I agree with that and would like to extend a sincere apology to David for the turn that this discussion took. I also apologise for my own remarks in the string which were, in truth, an attempt to correct the damage but themselves seem to have made the situation worse. I have no criticism of David’s decision to convert to Catholicism and I have no criticisms of David as a person. I do have strong differences in perspective to some of his theological views and what it means to be a Catholic — and it has been those issues that I have been seeking to engage David in discussion about from time to time. My own comments concerning David’s employment have been seriously misconstrued but I accept responsibility for that happening because of failings in how I expressed my arguments. My criticism was not intended to be of David but of the system and ecclesial leadership that seems to bend over backwards to support the worldview promoted, or held by, people who share the sort of perspectives put forward by David and it is seemingly uncaring of the needs of others who have different worldviews of what Catholicism, spirituality and the search for God, truth and meaning is all about. People who question are not given favourable treatment in employment in the institution today. There are many people, including myself and others who have found a home at Catholica, who can provide eloquent testimony to that. That is the point I was seeking to make. That is a criticism of the institution and its leadership. It is NOT a criticism of David.
Personally I do have respect for David in that I sincerely do believe he is one of the more articulate of the conservative voices in the Church today and he does have the guts to nail his colours to the mast in public cyberspace. I wish there were a lot more people in positions of public accountability and leadership within the institution who had the fortitude, or felt confident enough, to contribute to the public debate on these important issues of what we believe/what we are seeking and the hows and whys.
David, please accept my sincere apologies on how this matter got seriously out of hand. From my growing experience as administrator of discussion forums in cyberspace I am acutely aware of the difficulties in conducting any rational discussion across this divide between those who have a “conservative” or “political” understanding of their faith and the rest of us who approach our faith and beliefs from other perspectives and paradigms. I do hope the discussions might continue in more amicable and mutually respectful ways.
Editor and Publisher
Thank you, Brian. All is forgiven and we are friends still, despite such radical differences of opinion on just about everything!
I should in fact thank all involved for raising the profile of this poor blog a couple of notches.
And let me assure you that I hold no-one in contempt for their comments. I reserve my real wrath and hatred for the Telsta/Bigpond “Help” desk and online billing system (which, I might just note, gives an entirely new meaning to the word “Help”). But that is another story…